Search for: "P. v. Long" Results 4401 - 4420 of 7,175
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Mar 2022, 4:39 pm by Dennis Crouch
Its advocates also claim support in some legislative history statements (e.g., p. 18). [read post]
16 Jul 2009, 8:36 pm
Ford Motor Co., 113 P.3d 82, 94-95 (Cal. 2005) (Campbell precludes something called "aggregate disgorgement," which the court analogized to punitive damages); Engle v. [read post]
8 Feb 2020, 9:58 am by MOTP
Background Atrium owns and operates a sixty-bed, long-term acute care hospital in Stafford, Texas. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 5:16 pm by Eugene Volokh
Textualists have long advised us to forgo that interpretive method. [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 5:05 pm by admin
In a seminal discrimination case, Casteneda v. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 7:00 am by Nedim Malovic
The present decision may be in fact contrasted to that of the High Court of England and Wales in Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus v Babel Sajft KFT [2020] EWHC 2858. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 2:21 am
McCarthy, Trademarks & Unfair Competition §18:48, p. 18–112 (4th ed. 2012) (“[U]ncontrolled and ‘naked’ licensing can result in such a loss of significance of a trademark that a federal registration should be cancelled”); Sun Banks of Fla., Inc. v. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 6:49 am
In a rather long decision, the Court made some important and potentially far reaching statements regarding the requirements to prove acquired distinctiveness. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:03 pm by Gustavo Arballo
 y "esa música va a matarte" de @tintalimon.- El idioma que usas condiciona tus decisiones morales vía @aberron a propósito de resultados sobre el caso de los trenes del clásico cuestionario de juicio moral (aquí nuestra versión del test). [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 8:55 am by WIMS
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions   <> National Environmental Dev v. [read post]
25 Jan 2021, 4:00 am by Sophie Corke
  The Article 7(1)(b) assessment therefore takes place firstly by reference to the goods or services to which it is applied, and secondly, according to the relevant public’s perception (Audi v OHIM, Case C‑398/08 P). [read post]